1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a protective coating which has an external non-stick surface. It relates likewise to the process for the manufacture of this coating and an article coated therewith.
2. Description of Background and Relevant Materials
It has long been known to coat all sorts of supports with a protective coating against natural and artificial damage, particularly chemical damage or that resulting from vandalism.
A first type of known coating comprises a paint or a thick coating which is flexible or rigid. Such a coating has various disadvantages, namely, it modifies the appearance of the support, it flakes off relatively rapidly, and requires frequent replacement.
A second type of coating comprises a silicone, silicate or the like which is powdered and is in liquid form. This type of coating likewise has various disadvantages, namely, the support is darkened which renders it less aesthetic in appearance, the coating loses its protective capability relatively quickly, for example, in two years.
A third type of coating guards against graffiti and unauthorized posting. In general, this type of coating is silicone, silicate or the like material based, combined with a parafin. This coating is applied on the support in a fluid form in order for it to be absorbed into the support. This type of coating also has various disadvantages: it must be replaced after each graffiti cleaning or after a few washings; it is not satisfactory both for anti-graffiti and for anti-posting coating for a long enough period, which for economic reasons should be at least two years; it cannot be applied to wet supports, even if the supports are barely damp, for example, cement which has dried for less than 28 days, it is often difficult to apply; it does not reinforce the support; in order to it to be effective, it must be applied in three or four layers; it does not resist the graffiti cleaning products; for the same product, there is no choice between matte or glossy finish; it does not make it possible to keep the support soil-resistant; it does not make it possible to clean graffiti without expensive and/or dangerous chemicals; after one or two cleanings, the support remains more or less stained and the outline of the graffiti remains in place; the cleaning operation, in terms of the manpower and cleaning products, costs too much compared with the price of the protection itself; the coating itself is expensive, both in terms of its application and its maintenance; finally, the coating does not prevent the proliferation of mosses, e.g., algae, lichens, mushrooms, and molds.